An independent journal about the Gannett Co. and the news industry's digital transition
GCI did not make the cut for the Washington Business Journal's awards program for the "healthiest employers" in the greater Washington area.
8:40, you make a lot of points until you got to this one:"People, the CEO isn't wrong. He simply might not have found the real leadership he needs for what we all know needs to be done. There is a right way and a wrong way ..."8:40 HE is supposed to supply that leadership. And a "leader" doesn't accept outrageous bonuses and huge pay raises when he's slashing jobs en masse and making the rest get by somehow on no raises/pay cuts, furloughs -- while being asked to do two or three jobs. A "leader" doesn't constantly seek to fill his pockets in greater portions every year when he's failed to demonstrate any ability to grow revenues -- after, what?, seven years now? Eight? I'm all for execs getting big bonuses. Nice big fat ones. For growing nice fat new revenue streams. Not simply for keeping net profits at a respectable figure by cannibalizing your products to the bone and cultivating a 'let them eat cake' culture that demoralizes the people who need to bring value to your vision. (Or lack thereof.)
8:40, meant to say you made a lot of good points until that one. Sorry.
From an interview with Alan Mulally, CEO of Ford:Q: Some Ford workers are upset about your compensation. (Mulally made $26.5 million in salary, stock options, bonuses and other compensation last year). What would you say to an hourly worker who asks why your pay is fair when a new hire makes less than $30,000 a year?A: My compensation is entirely tied to the success of Ford. The vast majority of my compensation is at risk, because the numbers that you see are only realizable if we profitably grow the corporation. And that's the way it should be. I believe in it so much that most of the management team and most of the salary team -- and also our wonderful employees that are represented by the UAW -- have had profit sharing plans. We're continuing to talk together about how to align all of our compensation even more. Because the most important thing for everybody is that they get a chance to participate in the profitable growth that we deliver.
You always read so much on this blog about publishers being deadbeats in their communities. I just saw on the facebook page of The Times in Shreveport that the President/Publisher is being honored at a benefit for one of the organizations in town. Shreveport is a very tight knit community. I knew they liked this guy but this is a huge honor. I guess they're not all bad.
Hi, Can anyone help me? I applied for my Gannett Pension on May 18, 2011 requesting a start date of Sepember 1, 2011. It has now been over a 120 days, does anyone know what the ture problem is with Gannett? I have talked to Pension Reps. and I really don't think they even know. Please help!!!
120 days is too long. They should have it within 90 days. This is the wording from the plan document from 2003. If you are unable to get a satisfactory response from the pension reps, the Department of Labor has overall responsibility for enforcing the ERISA laws.You will receive a written or electronic notice informingyou of the decision of the Gannett Corporate BenefitsDepartment within 90 days after your claim is received. Ifspecial circumstances require, the initial 90-day decisionmakingperiod may be extended up to a period of 90 additionaldays. If this happens, the Gannett Corporate BenefitsDepartment will provide you with a written notice of theextension. You will get this notice before the end of theinitial 90-day period. The notice will indicate the specialcircumstances requiring the extension and the expecteddecision date.
@1:26 p.m.: Shreveport Times publisher Pete Zanmiller is being honored "because the Times announced a year's campaign to highlight child abuse." Zanmiller isn't responsible for the year-long series. The investigative reporter at the Times is responsible--she came up with the idea after a number of child deaths--and she's pursuing the stories with little editorial support, carving out time from her other responsibilities. Zanmiller isn't a bad guy but like most Gannett publishers he's all about the money, and he'll move on eventually.
AOL Patch cuts content budgets and the two year old buzz around hyperlocal continues to die a slow deathhttp://www.businessinsider.com/are-sniper-layoffs-going-on-at-aol-2011-9
Coming back next month when there's anything interesting to read, true or not.
Gannett stock down 10% and therefore net worth down hugely and really it is down 50% from when I sold at $18.50 in Jan of 2010.Scary time is here and with the quarter end approaching ,there must be a lot of knives being sparpened by now to prepare for the massive cuts that must happen and SOON!
Zanmiller ultimately is responsible for what the team produces. The reporter deserves due, as you say. That reporter embarks with a belief that what they do will get published and supported in some form. Z is a friend to journalists, taking a beating from GCI in tough moments. He is honorable and straightforward .. which is why you don't read many bad comments about him. He is stuck with mandates and goals whereby he can only do so much -- or quit. He doesn't get due from GCI because his success was tied to an old network, not the new leadership. His errors have been honest, and he makes up for much the way he operates and devotes time in the community as a real publisher.
Meant to say "He has been honest about his errors".
The honor is not material other than to indicate the reality. Zanmiller = one of the good guys. He came up through the old network, which is why his career probably stalled. He devotes REAL time in the community.
Gannett owns half the Arizona Daily Star in Tucson, but the paper is run by Lee, which owns the other half of the company. It's fascinating to see what Lee has done with its latest round of layoffs there. The Business Desk has two editors and one reporter, the Features desk has three editors and two reporters, the Tucson & Region Desk (essentially the City Desk) has six editors and 19 reporters, and the Estrella product has 1 editor and one reporter. The paper also still has an executive editor, a managing editor and an assistant managing editor. Add those all up, and you have 15 editors and 23 reporters. The Editorial Department, by the way, has one editorial writer and one cartoonist. There's no editor listed. All of the numbers are from the staff list on the website: http://utilities.azstarnet.com/contact/ For all of its faults, at least Gannett is cutting upper management at some properties in order to keep reporters, or at least balance out the number of editors and reporters. You have to wonder how long it will be before Gannett intervenes in Tucson to right the ship. Gannett always aimed at having one editor for five reporters. By that standard, the Star could lose 10 editors.
12:45's post is an example of why journalists have made journalism into a dead end.While there's no disputing the skewed management numbers, the call for management cuts from within ensures one thing: There will be fewer positions for people to be promoted into. And that means no upward mobility -- ever.Yet people within the newsrooms continue to call for cuts within their own organization. Some people just can't see the big picture.
This comment has been removed by a blog administrator.
1:25 pm Obviously a member of management. The "big picture" is the overused phase by buzz word loving, ineffective management.
Way to dodge the point, 2:40. As long as people are calling for the elimination of newsroom management positions in their own organization, the chances for upward mobility decrease.Sorry if you can't grasp the concept.
Maintaining a bloated management structure will only hasten the death of the company. Remember, management’s strategic thinking and the ability to see the “big picture” has guided Gannett to its current state.
OK, but calling for the slashing of management positions within one's own organization hastens the demise of many careers. Are you seriously saying it's better to have people locked into the hourly reporting wages for life, with sporadic raises that usually don't match the cost of living? Because that's what you're getting with your idea.
1:24, let's keep laying off the reporters and holding onto the editors. Then we can promote the remaining reporters into editors and shift to wire stories, which are cheaper anyway. The readers will never catch on ...
Just commenting on a failing company with a bloated management structure.
I heard when the Design Centers actually (and finally) are in operation, folks there won't be writing headlines or editing copy, only designing pages. Being discussed now -- individual newspapers might need to hire copy editors back! How sad to come to this realization when we said it wouldn't work when we were laid off two years ago. I'm not a rocket scientist, but even our crackerjack team missed deadline from time to time and we were putting out one paper. How do you go from cutting staff, consolidating copy editing/design processes for numerous papers and getting it out the door on time and looking great! Just saying ..
Good try, 4:30, but that's a whole other argument. It relates more to the design studio post presented later.
Regarding: Hi, Can anyone help me? I applied for my Gannett Pension on May 18, 2011 requesting a start date of Sepember 1, 2011. It has now been over a 120 days, does anyone know what the ture problem is with Gannett? I have talked to Pension Reps. and I really don't think they even know. Please help!!! It took about 84 days, plus or minus 1, from when I sent in all signed forms inclding spousal concent to receive my pension payout.
I've never seen a publisher come into a community and be so welcomed the way Zanmiller has. He's out in the public representing The Times and everyone is very excited about him being honored at the Gingerbread House event in November. You would think he was born here.
4:36 - "looking great" was never part of the return-on-investment calculations.If you have ANY doubts on that, look at the ads done by the GIADC.
Jim says: "Proceed with caution; this is a free-for-all comment zone. I try to correct or clarify incorrect information. But I can't catch everything. Please keep your posts focused on Gannett and media-related subjects. Note that I occasionally review comments in advance, to reject inappropriate ones. And I ignore hostile posters, and recommend you do, too."
Note: Only a member of this blog may post a comment.